Our Jim and the big green
Brisbane ALP Lord Mayor, Jim Soorley, has a proposal to make us all environmentally friendly and to stop the destruction of the biosphere. He tells us so in his many new TV advertisements on the subject. It's so simple that one wonders why no-one has thought of it before.
On June 5, World Environment Day, everyone was called upon to tie a green ribbon around their letter-boxes. And not just any green ribbon, but a uniform Council-approved green ribbon. The money will of course go to some as yet unnamed but very worthy (Jim swears it!) government scheme to save our environment. Unfortunately, however, Jim's new-found concern for the environment has its limits. You see, TV is one thing but, say, a speakout in the City Mall on the subject is another — such things have just been banned by our Jim.
Drake Astrid
Brisbane
Not voluntary
I am writing in relation to a small piece which appeared on page 6 of the Green Left Weekly 6 May 1992 concerning the recently released report of the Inquiry into Equal Opportunity and Equal Status for Women in Australia ("the Lavarch Report").
The piece stated that at present compliance with the provisions of the Affirmative Action (Equal Employment Opportunity for Women) Act 1986 is voluntary. Unfortunately this is incorrect. All relevant employers, that is companies with 100 or more employees and higher education institutions are required by section 6(1) of the Act to develop and implement an affirmative action program. In addition, relevant employers must provide the Agency with an annual report on their programs.
At present companies are named in Parliament if they either fail to submit a report without being granted an exemption by the Director or if the report is inadequate and requests for further information are not met. Compliance rates of 95-99% indicate that companies perceive the sanction of being named in parliament as quite powerful. Indeed, some of the small numbers which are named report soon afterwards possibly because of bad publicity and community opinion.
I have been conducting an effectiveness review of the Act on behalf of the Director and recently completed a series of nationwide consultations. A final report is being prepared for release later this year, and will be the basis for a cabinet submission on recommended changes to the Act. We are formulating ways of making qualitative assessments of the reports and developing measures for improving quality of programs. We hope to build on the strong support for affirmative action in the workplace which was identified in research for the review.
Philippa Hall
Principal Consultant
Affirmative Action Agency
Sydney
Rotting planet
The earth summit was not only an expensive joke, it was in many ways a wake. It came 15 years too late and the US has got nothing better to do than to belittle or ignore the massive problems we face.Neo-colonialistic exploitation, catastrophic overpopulation blessed by the catholic church and other cloud-land based groups, institutionalised corruption and entrenched interests all stand in the way of rescuing this rotting planet.
In his pathetic speech chief destruction guru Bush made it clear he would put the welfare of his beloved christian families before the environment. Perhaps when the sun and the acid rain will burn people and crops to death, or when chemical and nuclear contamination start to cause deformities on a large scale will Mr Bush listen. One should however not focus on the US alone. The developmentalist mafia is strong and increasingly well organised in other countries as well.
Michael Rose-Schwab
Rapid Creek NT
The kits are all right
Having borrowed and read the World Environment Day Kit for 1992, I can find nothing in it that could have caused the Federal Minister for the Environment, Mrs Kelly, to resile from her previous endorsement of it.
The question arises — who has the power to force a Minister of the Crown to repudiate something she sincerely believes in?
Only the Prime Minister, or people who can influence the Prime Minister, such as newspaper proprietors with rural interests, or very rich pastoralists with high political connections, who are busily engaged in just such destructive practices as are described in the kit. Have they exerted such influence?
In fact, the kit has two major weaknesses not mentioned by its critics.
It does not, as has been alleged, call for the removal of farmers from the land. Yet it should. Else much of the land will become so degraded that it will be unsalvageable in the foreseeable future.
Secondly, it fails to correctly analyse the relationship between people in the undeveloped countries, the environment and uncontrolled population growth. In fact, population growth is not mentioned as a matter of concern. It should have first priority.
C.M. Friel
Alawa NT